RE: [Cameramakers] Process camera for 8x10 and 7x17 enlarger?

[Michael Mutmansky]

Leonard,   Good advice.  I was definitely planning to get one ‘locally’, which means either I can go pick it up, or they can bring it to me.  It may involve some hours of driving, but that seems to be the way to do it.    I have been considering the 4x5 enlarger conversion route, and that is still an option.  The real problem is that I don’t use anything smaller than the 8x10 for B&W, so I don’t have an enlarger at this moment.  To buy a 4x5 enlarger and then convert it seemed just as difficult as getting a copy camera, and a bit more limited in options due to the height limit of the enlarger.  That’s how I settled on the copy camera.   Anyone have a recommendation on the amount of output an 8x10 head should have?  What is the wattage of the Aristo heads?  How about a typical 8x10 head for a Durst, or Devere?  I think the incandescent heads run 1500 to 2000 watts.  That is equivalent to 500 to about 650 watts of fluorescent light.   Thanks,   ---Michael Mutmansky   -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Leonard Robertson Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 6:52 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Cameramakers] Process camera for 8x10 and 7x17 enlarger?   Michael,     If you can't find a process camera within driving distance so you can pick it up, be sure you know the shipping charges before bidding on one on eBay. I wouldn't trust the seller's "estimate" of camera weight, either. Being "...in a fairly rural area.." may work in your favor; some of the small print shops may be just converting to computerized printing. I don't know if small newspapers ever used process cameras, but it might be worth finding out.     I don't know if you have done calculations on the maximum size enlargement you want to make and the enlarging lens you plan to use. This will tell you how much bellows you need and length of camera bed. I suspect some of the vertical cameras are a little short in this department, compared with horizontal models. An Artar-type process lens with limited coverage will need more bellows extension than a G-Claron with wider coverage. I've seen larger horizontal cameras that were "two room" models - the copy board,bed, and bellows in one room and the film holder through the wall into a darkroom. If you end up with a long camera and are limited in darkroom space, you could have your negative holder/light source outside the darkroom. Not very handy, but might work.     If you can't find a process camera at a reasonable price/distance, you may need to decide if you can get by with just enlarging 8X10. Converting a 4X5 or 5X7 enlarger to 8X10 would be an option then. I thought I had a link Bookmarked for an 8X10 enlarger conversion, but can't find it. I did find one for a 4"X14" enlarger you may find of interest:  http://www.bigshotz.co.nz/projects.html  You might be able to scale his ideas up to 7X17.     Finally, a word of warning if you start looking for a process camera. A few years ago, I bought a 19" plain Artar and a 30" Red Dot Artar, $175 for the pair (this was prior to the current flood of process lenses on the market, so it really was a give away price). The catch was, the lenses came with a huge Robertson horizontal camera (18' long bed, all steel constuction, very heavy). The seller wouldn't let me have the lenses, even after I paid him, until the camera was actually loaded on my trailer. I still have the camera, although it is sitting outside in the weather. I can't bring myself to cut it up. I was able to use the 3/4 HP motor from the vaccum pump on a milling machine. Someday I plan to use the pump when I get to doing 12X20. Anyway, be careful what might follow you home when you start looking for a big camera.                                                                                                                                   Leonard ----- Original Message ----- From: Michael Mutmansky To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2003 2:48 PM Subject: [Cameramakers] Process camera for 8x10 and 7x17 enlarger?   Greetings group,   I am thinking about converting a 14x18 or so process camera into an enlarger for my 8x10 and possibly also my 7x17 negatives.  The primary purpose is to make enlarged negatives for contact printing.   I was wondering if I could get some thoughts on what copy camera would be the best to start with?  There are vertical cameras, and horizontal cameras by various makers out there.  I can see an advantage to a horizontal camera, except that the space may be a problem, and I would need to use some kind of vacuum easel.   Anyone have any specific recommendations for the ‘best’ camera to start with?  I expect that I may have to go to Ebay for the camera, as I’m in a fairly rural area, but I will try the local printers around here once I have an idea in mind.   Also, I need to figure out an inexpensive light source to start with.  I have seen the archives, and expect that a fluorescent head will be a decent way to start, although not the cheapest.  Anyone try to take several halogen worklights and add a mixing chamber to make a light source?   I’m new to this ng, but I have searched the archives, and I find there are many friendly, and ingenious people on the group.   ---Michael